[Bug c++/94673] [concepts] What is the return type of local parameters of requires expressions?

2021-09-21 Thread gcc-bugs at marehr dot dialup.fu-berlin.de via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94673 gcc-bugs at marehr dot dialup.fu-berlin.de changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |WORKSFORME

[Bug c++/94673] [concepts] What is the return type of local parameters of requires expressions?

2021-09-20 Thread gcc-bugs at marehr dot dialup.fu-berlin.de via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94673 --- Comment #3 from gcc-bugs at marehr dot dialup.fu-berlin.de --- I think this bug should be changed to a request to improve the diagnostics. The diagnostic says: ``` :13:15: note: constraints not satisfied :8:9: required by the constraints

[Bug libstdc++/96416] to_address() is broken by static_assert in pointer_traits

2021-08-05 Thread gcc-bugs at marehr dot dialup.fu-berlin.de via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96416 gcc-bugs at marehr dot dialup.fu-berlin.de changed: What|Removed |Added CC||gcc-bugs at

[Bug c++/100205] [11/12 Regression] error: invalid use of non-static data member

2021-05-18 Thread gcc-bugs at marehr dot dialup.fu-berlin.de via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100205 --- Comment #11 from gcc-bugs at marehr dot dialup.fu-berlin.de --- Awesome, thank you, Jason!

[Bug libstdc++/100587] std::ranges::empty_view is not a view

2021-05-13 Thread gcc-bugs at marehr dot dialup.fu-berlin.de via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100587 gcc-bugs at marehr dot dialup.fu-berlin.de changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |INVALID

[Bug libstdc++/100587] New: std::range::empty_view is not a view

2021-05-13 Thread gcc-bugs at marehr dot dialup.fu-berlin.de via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100587 Bug ID: 100587 Summary: std::range::empty_view is not a view Product: gcc Version: 10.3.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component:

[Bug libstdc++/95983] `std::counted_iterator>>` fails to satisfy `std::input_or_output_iterator`

2021-05-04 Thread gcc-bugs at marehr dot dialup.fu-berlin.de via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95983 --- Comment #11 from gcc-bugs at marehr dot dialup.fu-berlin.de --- Thank you so much!

[Bug libstdc++/100233] New: [10/11/12] std::views::elements only accepts types that are defined on std::get

2021-04-23 Thread gcc-bugs at marehr dot dialup.fu-berlin.de via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100233 Bug ID: 100233 Summary: [10/11/12] std::views::elements only accepts types that are defined on std::get Product: gcc Version: 10.3.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug c++/100205] [11 Regression] error: invalid use of non-static data member

2021-04-22 Thread gcc-bugs at marehr dot dialup.fu-berlin.de via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100205 --- Comment #3 from gcc-bugs at marehr dot dialup.fu-berlin.de --- To be more precise my gcc build is: ``` > gcc-git -v Using built-in specs. COLLECT_GCC=/opt/gcc/gcc-git//bin/g++

[Bug c++/100205] [11 Regression] error: invalid use of non-static data member

2021-04-22 Thread gcc-bugs at marehr dot dialup.fu-berlin.de via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100205 --- Comment #2 from gcc-bugs at marehr dot dialup.fu-berlin.de --- Yeah, it compiled for me with a build from two weeks ago, too. I should have mentioned that :)

[Bug c++/100205] New: [11 Regression] error: invalid use of non-static data member

2021-04-22 Thread gcc-bugs at marehr dot dialup.fu-berlin.de via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100205 Bug ID: 100205 Summary: [11 Regression] error: invalid use of non-static data member Product: gcc Version: 11.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug libstdc++/100146] __cpp_lib_to_chars not defined

2021-04-20 Thread gcc-bugs at marehr dot dialup.fu-berlin.de via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100146 --- Comment #10 from gcc-bugs at marehr dot dialup.fu-berlin.de --- Thank you!

[Bug libstdc++/95983] `std::counted_iterator>>` fails to satisfy `std::input_or_output_iterator`

2021-04-20 Thread gcc-bugs at marehr dot dialup.fu-berlin.de via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95983 --- Comment #4 from gcc-bugs at marehr dot dialup.fu-berlin.de --- Hi Patrick, thank you for that patch. I guess that it also fixes https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96070. Will this patch be backported to gcc-10? Great work!

[Bug libstdc++/100146] New: __cpp_lib_to_chars not defined

2021-04-19 Thread gcc-bugs at marehr dot dialup.fu-berlin.de via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100146 Bug ID: 100146 Summary: __cpp_lib_to_chars not defined Product: gcc Version: 11.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: libstdc++

[Bug libstdc++/100139] New: std::views::{take, drop} don't type erase

2021-04-18 Thread gcc-bugs at marehr dot dialup.fu-berlin.de via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100139 Bug ID: 100139 Summary: std::views::{take, drop} don't type erase Product: gcc Version: 11.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component:

[Bug libstdc++/99433] [11 Regression] custom friend pipe-operator| conflicts with range adaptor?

2021-04-09 Thread gcc-bugs at marehr dot dialup.fu-berlin.de via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99433 --- Comment #7 from gcc-bugs at marehr dot dialup.fu-berlin.de --- Thank you for the quick analysis! > views​::​drop(E, F) is specified to be expression-equivalent to the braced > init ranges​::​drop_­view{E, F} Is not completely true, right?

[Bug libstdc++/99433] [11 Regression] custom friend pipe-operator| conflicts with range adaptor?

2021-04-08 Thread gcc-bugs at marehr dot dialup.fu-berlin.de via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99433 --- Comment #5 from gcc-bugs at marehr dot dialup.fu-berlin.de --- Thank you for the fix, but the following code does not compile any more: ```c++ #include #include int main() { std::list list; constexpr auto drop = [](urng_t && urange,

[Bug c++/99599] [11 Regression] Concepts requirement falsely reporting cyclic dependency, breaks tag_invoke pattern

2021-04-02 Thread gcc-bugs at marehr dot dialup.fu-berlin.de via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99599 --- Comment #3 from gcc-bugs at marehr dot dialup.fu-berlin.de --- Hi Jason, as you linked to https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97704, I'm interested if your suggestion would allow that, too? > But that's a matter for the committee

[Bug libstdc++/99433] [11 Regression] custom friend pipe-operator| conflicts with range adaptor?

2021-03-08 Thread gcc-bugs at marehr dot dialup.fu-berlin.de via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99433 gcc-bugs at marehr dot dialup.fu-berlin.de changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|custom friend |[11

[Bug c++/99433] New: custom friend pipe-operator| conflicts with range adaptor?

2021-03-06 Thread gcc-bugs at marehr dot dialup.fu-berlin.de via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99433 Bug ID: 99433 Summary: custom friend pipe-operator| conflicts with range adaptor? Product: gcc Version: 11.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug rtl-optimization/99320] constexpr defined arrays within constexpr functions would benefit from lookup-tables

2021-03-01 Thread gcc-bugs at marehr dot dialup.fu-berlin.de via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99320 --- Comment #2 from gcc-bugs at marehr dot dialup.fu-berlin.de --- You are right, it seems to be the same issue except that my function is constexpr, and I can't use `static constexpr ...` within the function, but Barry mentioned that use case

[Bug rtl-optimization/99320] New: constexpr defined arrays within constexpr functions would benefit from lookup-tables

2021-03-01 Thread gcc-bugs at marehr dot dialup.fu-berlin.de via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99320 Bug ID: 99320 Summary: constexpr defined arrays within constexpr functions would benefit from lookup-tables Product: gcc Version: 10.2.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug c++/99318] New: [10/11 Regression] -Wdeprecated-declarations where non-should be?

2021-03-01 Thread gcc-bugs at marehr dot dialup.fu-berlin.de via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99318 Bug ID: 99318 Summary: [10/11 Regression] -Wdeprecated-declarations where non-should be? Product: gcc Version: 10.2.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug c++/97745] [10 Regression] ICE in tsubst_decl, at cp/pt.c:14666

2020-12-30 Thread gcc-bugs at marehr dot dialup.fu-berlin.de via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97745 --- Comment #2 from gcc-bugs at marehr dot dialup.fu-berlin.de --- This bug is fixed and can be closed. This ICE was reduced from our code base (https://github.com/seqan/seqan3/issues/2236#issuecomment-723194705).

[Bug c++/97704] [11 Regression][concepts] Not working with explicit types in function signatures?

2020-12-17 Thread gcc-bugs at marehr dot dialup.fu-berlin.de via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97704 --- Comment #3 from gcc-bugs at marehr dot dialup.fu-berlin.de --- Thank you, Marek Polacek for finding that revision. I checked out the master branch and reverted the commit f1612b8ae8a60f62cf5456b3357a341550534a7e and now everything compiles

[Bug libstdc++/97759] Could std::has_single_bit be faster?

2020-11-09 Thread gcc-bugs at marehr dot dialup.fu-berlin.de via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97759 --- Comment #10 from gcc-bugs at marehr dot dialup.fu-berlin.de --- And maybe a related question: I know that an arithmetic implementation might auto-vectorize, but would a popcount implementation do that too? Since AVX512_BITALG

[Bug libstdc++/97759] Could std::has_single_bit be faster?

2020-11-09 Thread gcc-bugs at marehr dot dialup.fu-berlin.de via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97759 --- Comment #9 from gcc-bugs at marehr dot dialup.fu-berlin.de --- Thank you for so many responses (In reply to Thomas Koenig from comment #1) > Could you post the benchmark and the exact architecture where the arithmetic > version is faster?

[Bug libstdc++/97759] Could std::has_single_bit be faster?

2020-11-09 Thread gcc-bugs at marehr dot dialup.fu-berlin.de via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97759 --- Comment #7 from gcc-bugs at marehr dot dialup.fu-berlin.de --- Created attachment 49530 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=49530=edit CMakeLists.txt

[Bug libstdc++/97759] Could std::has_single_bit be faster?

2020-11-09 Thread gcc-bugs at marehr dot dialup.fu-berlin.de via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97759 --- Comment #8 from gcc-bugs at marehr dot dialup.fu-berlin.de --- Created attachment 49531 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=49531=edit has_single_bit_benchmark.cpp

[Bug libstdc++/97759] New: Could std::has_single_bit implementation be faster?

2020-11-08 Thread gcc-bugs at marehr dot dialup.fu-berlin.de via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97759 Bug ID: 97759 Summary: Could std::has_single_bit implementation be faster? Product: gcc Version: 10.2.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3

[Bug c++/97704] [11 Regression][concepts] Not working with explicit types in function signatures?

2020-11-03 Thread gcc-bugs at marehr dot dialup.fu-berlin.de via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97704 --- Comment #1 from gcc-bugs at marehr dot dialup.fu-berlin.de --- I forgot to add the error message: ``` : In instantiation of 'auto hard_error(t) [with t = int]': :11:35: required by substitution of 'template requires

[Bug c++/96872] [11 Regression] ICE: Segmentation fault

2020-11-03 Thread gcc-bugs at marehr dot dialup.fu-berlin.de via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96872 --- Comment #2 from gcc-bugs at marehr dot dialup.fu-berlin.de --- Thank you; was fixed!

[Bug c++/97704] New: [11 Regression][concepts] Not working with explicit types in function signatures?

2020-11-03 Thread gcc-bugs at marehr dot dialup.fu-berlin.de via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97704 Bug ID: 97704 Summary: [11 Regression][concepts] Not working with explicit types in function signatures? Product: gcc Version: 11.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED